Laurens Holst wrote:
> As discussed and agreed with by many on www-html, I request the removal
> of the navigation list (<nl>) element, as defined in section 11.2 of the
> XHTML 2.0 working draft dated May 27th, 2005.
>
> Rationale can be found in the discussion on www-html, e.g.:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005May/0137
>
> Basically, I think that the <nl> element could be better expressed as
> <ul role="navigation">. The case the specification makes about removing
> the need for scripting is hardly a good one, as web site authors will
> usually desire much more control (style, behavior) than the <nl> element
> offers.
Why just this element? A lot of elements can be removed now there is a
way to use RDF features to describe them. XHTML 2.0 could probably be
reduced to the xhtml2:html, xhtml2:div and xhtml2:span elements and
various attribute modules.
However, I'm not sure if such abstraction is a good idea.
I believe there is also a subtle difference between |role="navigation"|
and the NL element. Where |role="navigation"| defines its relation to
other elements within the document the NL element denotes that its
content are to be used for navigation.
A simple example:
<section role="navigation">
<h>Browse around, freely</h>
<p>Various sections of this site include:</p>
<nl>
...
The ROLE attribute on the SECTION element indicates its relation to
other sections within the document where the NL element describes the
function.
Also, how do you qualify 'many'?
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>